Hello from France

[ecliptique]

Hello everyone!

 

I'm a professional photographer who live just near Paris, France and speak english not very well ;) .

I took my first UV picture 3 weeks ago after reading many informations on this website (thank a lot!). I try to progress in this way but my objectif is not to make some perfect scientific pictures but only pleasant fine art photography in UV range.

 

 

I practice also IR photography since two years.You can find here a spherical IR panorama I took last year.

 

For UV photgraphy, I use Nikon D3 and many EL-nikkor and Apo-nikkor lenses, two modified Nikon SB24 flashes and Baader U filter.

But the main element for me is Cambo Actus. It's permit to mount many differents lenses and control focal plan. I've just write an article about Actus here. I use it for studio photography and now for UV.

 

I use also focus stacking to increase deep of field in association with Actus tilt and shift capabilities, as you can see below.

HD version without tag here.

 

HD version without tag here.

 

Thank you to accept me on this forum.

 

Laurent

[nfoto]

Very exciting. You are most welcome here at UVP.

 

Feel free to contribute images in UV or IR, we love both ;).

[Andrea B.]

Hello Laurent and welcome to UltravioletPhotography.com.

I hope you enjoy the site and its technical information and photographs.

Please feel free to ask questions and post your own experiments and findings.

 

We are very much looking forward to your contributions.

 

*******

 

I have just recently learned of the Cambo Actus myself, so it will be interesting to read your article. Thank you for the link.

 

I want to ask you about your use of the D3 for UV photography. Have you removed the internal filtration? Do you experience any IR contamination in your UV photos because of the D3's Infrared shutter monitor? I myself was unable to use the Nikon D700 for UV photography because of such an Infrared shutter monitor.

[nfoto]

Just to add my own observations of the D3 as a UV camera: I had to give it up because of that pesky IR-based shutter monitor LED. Some shooting conditions, such as using studio flash and X synch in a not too bright room, gave creditable UV images. However, for all outdoor assignments I never could get rid of the IR contamination. The camera was torn down by my Nikon repair tech and rebuilt several times while we investigated various possible solution to the issue. Eventually I gave up, restored the camera for visible use, and sold it off.

 

I replaced D3 with a broad-spectrum modified D600 instead.

[ecliptique]

Hi Andrea,

 

I want to ask you about your use of the D3 for UV photography. Have you removed the internal filtration?

 

Yes. Low-pass and Antialiasing.

 

Do you experience any IR contamination in your UV photos because of the D3's Infrared shutter monitor? I myself was unable to use the Nikon D700 for UV photography because of such an Infrared shutter monitor.

 

Very good question: I've see that!

 

My - not too bad - solution is to use max sync speed (1/250) with flashes. IR contamination is not visible from 1/90 to /8000 but it's better to use max sync speed because it's possible to see the Ir contamination zone after post production and white balance setting if time exposure is too long.

 

I know that it's a real problem and I'll modify another APN for UV photos. D600 is ok ? Have you a list of Nikon APN UV-compatible ???

[nfoto]

OK. You confirm my observations regarding the D3. As I already stated, the only way of getting UV images of acceptable quality was using my powerful studio flashes (Broncolor, uncoated Xenon tubes), and "X" synch. Anything else was hopeless in UV due to the IR contamination from the shutter monitor. This in turn implied I couldn't use the camera for most of my UV work outdoors. Even with a UV-Nikkor, you do need quite long shutter speeds for UV work in natural light.

 

The modified D600 works well enough and I believe D610 is similar. No information on the behaviour of D750, D800, or D810.

[Andrea B.]

D610, D750, D800, D800E, D810 are all good possibilities.

 

For studio art photography I think you would perhaps enjoy using the 36MP D810.

 

I would skip the D600 unless you can get one which has had the shutter oil splatter problem fixed. So the D610 is probably the better choice in that range. No one yet has mentioned the D750, but I think it would be good also.

[ecliptique]

D610, D750, D800, D800E, D810 are all good possibilities.

 

Ok. I've many DSLR and my idea is to buy a new D610 and modify my "old" D600 (it have the new shutter without oil).

 

And what's about DX format ? It's a good idea for macro or photography with teleobjectifs... D7100 ou 7200 are ok ?

 

For studio art photography I think you would perhaps enjoy using the 36MP D810.

 

It's the best APN I ever have! Maybe it will be good for UV and IR photography.

 

And i'll keep my D3 for IR photography. It's not too bad for that:

with 17-35mm

 

and with 600mm ais

[nfoto]

I'm using a D3200 as a UV camera for rough field use. It has a Baader U2" filter inside so can handle virtually all lenses for UV shooting.

 

As the problem with D3 was only manifested in UV, I reckon it'll serve you well for IR. My current IR camera is a converted D5300 though, because it makes a nice field kit with D3200 (UV), D5300 (IR), and Df (visible). All support GPS, use the same battery type, and share other accessories.

[Andrea B.]

When I tried the D700 (which has an IR shutter monitor) for UV/IR, I had problems also with IR work. Of course, IR contamination is not as noticeable in an IR photograph, but was still there. It also depends on what cutoff you are using for your IR filter. Most likely you can use the D3 for IR and not see too many problems.

 

Here in the US I have tried to make sure our main retail conversion shops (LifePixel, Kolari, MaxMax) all know that the D700, D3/3S/D3X and D4/4S should not be converted to broadband. They seem to take care to let people know that.

 

The D7000/7100/7200 line is good for UV/IR. More noise than the D600/800 line. I used a D7000 for awhile.

 

I have used a D600 for the last 3 years. It is excellent for UV/IR.

 

UV photography tends to be dark and noisy and can made good use of a sensor with large dynamic range and high-ISO capabilities. My personal opinion is therefore that certain Sony sensors found in Nikon and Sony bodies are the best choice for good image quality in UV/IR. Under excellent illumination and at lower ISOs, fine work can also be done with other bodies - Lumix, Olympus, Pentax. I've been happy with my GH1 and my K5 in good light.

[colinbm]

Hi Laurent,

Welcome to UVP forum.

Well you are off to a good start & I look forwards to your contributions :D

 

APN for UV photos, I am not familiar with term ?

 

Cheers

Col

[nfoto]

He probably means a digital camera, Colin. If my rusty French is to be trusted ....

[Andrea B.]

appareil photo numerique = digital photo apparatus = digital camera

My French spelling may not be correct. It has been a long time.

[ecliptique]

appareil photo numerique = digital photo apparatus = digital camera

 

Yes ! Sorry !!!! I just want to write DSLR and not the french acronym APN. :D

 

My French spelling may not be correct. It has been a long time.

 

No, it's perfect. :(

 

I'll see with Nikon France to modify my D600 and will post some news pictures ASAP. But I have some good D3 to show you...

[colinbm]

Thanks Andrea Bjorn & Laurent

That would have taken me a thousand years to work that out :D

Col

[nfoto]

In many European countries, you have to learn *a lot of* languages in school. Thus, I had Norwegian, Neo-Norwegian, Danish, Swedish, Icelandic, English, German, and French. I understand some Dutch as well, but would never dare to speak any of it as the weird pronunciation might kill me ... At University 95% of the text books were in German or English.

 

I had French as a major language in (the equivalent of) College and actually was quite good and comfortable with the language. However, never used it after graduation so it has rusted away.

 

I'm currently watching a peculiar Belgian drama series on TV and they speak all Flemish. Just for fun I switched off the subtitles and found I could understand just enough to follow the storyline.

 

Had I been younger I probably would learn some Russian too. It's a huge benefit if you travel in Eastern Europe.

[colinbm]

In the great land down-under Bjorn, we are only taught three languages......English, 'Strayun' & Swearing......not necessarily in that order :D

Col

[nfoto]

From what I have heard of Australian swearing, it can substitute for Dutch or Flemish.

 

Okay, back on topic. We now have APN as a nice synonym (actually, acronym) for a digital camera. No more confusion.

[baffe]

Hi Laurent!

 

Beautiful pictures!

 

Helpful article about "Actus"!

 

Stefan

[Damon]

Welcome Laurent, I love seeing new rigs and what others have figured out. Can you take landscapes with that Cambo Actus? Your pics are lovely and fine art style in my book. Nice stuff.

So I say welcome again to the intriguing rabbit hole that is multi-spectral photography.

 

-Damon

[Bill De Jager]

Andrea and Bjørn, any sense of which of low noise and high dynamic range might be most beneficial for UV photography? They often but not always go together in a given camera.

[nfoto]

My feeling is low noise first, then dynamic range. The reason is that a UV image file needs quite a lot of massaging of the colours and this in itself is prone to generate noise. So best to start with as little inherent noise as possible.

[Bill De Jager]

Thanks, Bjørn!